This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
Re: Can sets have order?
- To: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
- Subject: Re: [xsl] Can sets have order?
- From: David Carlisle <davidc at nag dot co dot uk>
- Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 17:47:37 GMT
- References: <200101251653.JAA23775@localhost.localdomain>
- Reply-To: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
Just noticed you said:
> > It just constructs the set of ancestors.
> In a particular order, right? Do you claim that it can return a node set in
> any order besides reverse document order?
YES!!! If you want to claim that it returns a node set that is ordered,
it is ordered in document order.
<xsl:variable name="x" select="attribute::*"/>
OK so $x is a node set. If it is ordered, then presumably
<xsl:copy-of select="$x[1]"/>
is it's first element, no?
well it gets the outer most element, the relevant order being document
order not reverse document order.
If $x was an odered set ordered by reverse document order, then
<xsl:copy-of select="$x[1]"/>
would be the same as
<xsl:copy-of select="ancestor::*[1]"/>
and select the parent.
It is in explaining why
<xsl:copy-of select="$x[1]"/>
isn't the same as
<xsl:copy-of select="ancestor::*[1]"/>
that it is helpful to stress that the node set $x is just a set, that it
doesn't "remember" that it was constructed in reverse order. In other
words the ordering isn't a property of the set $x.
David
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list